I always like what Malick tries to do, but his films always leave me cold.
The Kids Are Alright on LD. Yes I know there's a great DVD and a Blu-ray, but I have this on LD with unrestored warbly audio that just feels like the 'OO.
10,000 smashed guitars out of 10,000 Patent exploding drummers.
1st thought: silly.
Now: why an xbox and not a ps3??
From what we've heard about the amount of care for items in the the archives I actually doubt intentional damage.The original Luke Vaporator scene had deep camera scratches. At one point the sandstorm sequence was supposedly put in a dumpster.
There is no reason that these should be presented this way. Especially if this is their "Complete" set. If they can go back and waste money on finishing deleted Prequel scenes then I think they could have afforded a little cleanup on some deleted scenes. Oh wait, at Lucasfilm film cleaning and restoration costs 5000% more than everywhere else. It must have been too expensive.
It looks like this is only going to be a selection of scenes. Why couldn't they finally release everything together? Honestly, I think at some point they should release the original rough edit.
Holidays in the Sun
I just had to crack out some of the Pistols today...
I agree it's hard to rate. I think it had me until the ending. Still an overall good amount of balls.
ROTJ V3 with hh's 5.1 mix, compared against the Faces LD and 97 LD.
5 definitive balls out of 5.
Ziggy Stardust said:
Moonage Daydream - David Bowie
One of the greatest songs ever.
zombie84 said:
I have three theories to explain this:
2) The duplicate stock was very bad. In 1985, there was a batch of Kodak stocks that was excessively grainy, and it was replaced the next year with an improved version. Aliens was shot on this, which is why that films looks really grainy, and Cameron is currently de-graining it for the Blu Ray release because he says he was never happy with how grainy it was (I disapprove, but that's another case). Now, negative raw stock is totally different from duplicate stock. I don't know if Kodak's duplicate stocks that year were affected by the issue. The stock Aliens was shot on was a low-light special stock, and low light = graininess, so its no surprise that grain would be a problem. I have a feeling that the duplicate stocks would not be afflicted by this issue, but just throwing it out there that 1985 was a bad year for unusual grain for what it is worth. The duplicate stock of Star Wars might not be so bad as to have the problem of the Aliens stock, but it would definitely be grainier than an interpositive printed today because the granularity of all stocks in the 70s and 80s was poorer.
Which would point to problem #2 as the main culprit. You can see negative dirt on the GOUT, but you can see some on the Technicolor print, so that can't be the problem either. There's print dirt and dust on the IP itself, but thats not what is making the image look like shit, it's just making the problem already there worse. The problem also seems to inexplicably get better as the film progresses, as the first two or three reels are really bad and then it gets better; I don't know how to explain that, maybe the negative of those reels was just much dirtier so the image just looks grainier.
I'm kind of rambling now, but the situation is a bit confusing.
I completely agree. I've always thought this was the main problem behind the video image looking this way. The 97 doesn't look like this, although with the smearing from the broadcast versions it starts to. And even the SE isn't as sharp as the original.
dark_jedi said:
LOL, some of you guys really LOVE your LD's to be going through all of them like this, I am 100% with Harmy on this one, I will probably never, ever watch an LD capture again, I definitely will never capture one again, but hey, to each their own right? but to me, I think all these screens that get posted in this thread and others look like shit, especially in motion on a large HDTV screen, I do agree with captainsolo above, the 97 SE LD's do look pretty good, a lot better than all these being posted, except for the pink issue he stated.
I reviewed hairy_hen's 5.1 and decided to compare it to both the original PCM and the 97 mix. So, I popped in my LD's and was surprised at how well the Faces ROTJ held up visually. Nowhere near the V3 or GOUT of course, but still not as bad as you would think.
The 97 image just blows it away. If the GOUT master could look like this without all of that smearing a heck of a lot of things would immediately be better. I've never gone straight from 93/95 to 97 but the jump in quality is readily apparent even on an old 4:3 TV. It just has that pink problem in Mos Eisley...because no official Star Wars release can ever be perfect let alone definitive.
I'm now seriously considering picketing the lines for the Blu-ray on release day.
Baronlando said:
My favorite part of that article-Jim Ward 2004: it’s hardly a controversy. We sold over $100 million in one day of this DVD around the world, so I don’t think anybody’s too upset about it. And any changes that George made, they might be controversial to about 5 people.”
Seriously? Just because they made a bunch of money means that everyone likes it?
I remember September 21st 2004 like it was yesterday. Stood in line to get my WS box set pre-order in a Toys R'Us. I got it home, and watched all three, becoming increasingly puzzled, frustrated, furious, and ultimately crushed. If I could have done something about it, I certainly would have. At first I thought it was problems with my TV or DVD player or something. All I had wanted was just the 97s on DVD. After realizing the colors weren't my equipment screwing up, I finally got to the end of Jedi and realized what I had just been duped into buying.
It killed the movies for me. It really did. I didn't watch any of the films again until a year or so after the GOUT. Officially in countless ways the worst home video release EVER.
Okay...I'm done now...;)
hh's ROTJ is probably the best possible mix for modern systems. Well balanced, detailed, just the right amount of LFE and clear. Comparing it to the 95 Faces disc (shouldn't have any differences form the 93) shows that they are almost the same.
I compared:
1. Hairy Hen's 5.1 remix
2. 1995 Faces repressing of the 93 Definitive collection-PCM Dolby ProLogic surround
3. 1997 SE-PCM Dolby ProLogic surround
(My system plays the single surround ProLogic channel over two speakers anyway so it will be a good comparison. I don't have an LD player with an ac3-RF out so I was limited to reviewing the PCM track for the SE.)
1 and 2: h_h's 5.1 is clearer and more detailed in the higher frequencies, whereas the 95 PCM is a little more detailed in the mids and lows. Trying to hear some of the details in hh's mix meant substantially increasing the volume on the PCM. I think the key difference between the two comes from the compression from lossless PCM to Dolby 448 kbp/s. I will really be interested to compare this to the lossless version of hh's mix when it is released.
I will admit I did enjoy some of the old-style ProLogic with a sub connected more than the discrete LFE channel. On the PCM track with a sub, Jabba's voice and laugh will boom everywhere and Lapti Nek becomes very punchy.
But when Jedi Rocks came up on the SE this way, I thought to myself: "What have I done?"
The LFE channel is very well done. I just miss some of the messy big booms.
3.The SE mix is surprisingly close to 1 and 2. It is noticeably more confined to the midrange and thus has less of a low end impact. The highs are also a bit reduced. However, it seems as if there is more detail revealed by the greater midrange so I can't really say which mix I like best.
Each of the three has it's own strengths and weaknesses. hh's 5.1 track would probably be best overall-especially for modern 5.1 systems, unless you can playback the 97 5.1 which will have a better midrange.
All in all, a very good remixing job.
hh, out of curiosity what exactly did you do on Empire and Jedi? Save for the LFE are they relatively unchanged from their 93 versions?
Why am I not at all surprised?
And why would LFL pump the color levels to such a terrible degree to match the Tech IB print of George's instead of merely SCANNING THE ACTUAL PRINT ITSELF?
;) It's cool cause it's a Decca rainbow label.
The primal wail...reduced to following a Caruso-ism. Sometimes I hate licensing.
I'm a Boy-The Who
Slower alternate version found only on the LP edition of Meaty Beaty Big and Bouncy.
I've never really been a fan of scary movies. I like to be chilled mentally and made to think about twisted things instead of jumping in shock. In fact, I hate things that make you jump in movies. To me it's a cop out.
For example, I hate the additions to the scene in Jaws where Hooper goes down to investigate the wreck of Ben Gardner's boat. Completely unecessary moment that was tacked on after previews.
I agree about the ordering. The 77 LP just seemed to zoom all over the place more than I was used to. I will admit my complete surprise at the dynamics and different mixing of my old damaged Fox LP.
ESB V3 with hh's 5.1 mix.
Uhh...can I say 70mm balls of sheer bass?
No problem. Here's the info thread. I think after doing these he decided to do the ESB audiophile.
These are really well done. I especially enjoyed being able to compare the RSO LP of Star Wars to my 20th Century Fox edition. Is the RSO LP of ESB still available?
After listening to Hairy_hen’s 5.1 70mm mix and 5.1 ESB mix, I went through my SW scores for the first time in years. Figured I’d start a thread for overall score discussion.
I found that overall, I’m not really happy with any of the official releases that I own. The original 77 double LP is probably the best overall, but that was remixed especially for home playback and places different emphasis and narrows the stereo image. And I understand that John Williams wanted to create a interesting listening experience (and it works with that in mind) but why the heck does the score order have to be so mixed up?
The 97SE releases while really nice looking and fully complete are just absolutely horrible. The sound is over-compressed, limited, remixed and frankly I think this is what turned me off to ever listening to these scores. I’ve had these releases for years and never listened to them more than once.
ABC’s salvage editions of all three scores are well done and provide a nice compromise as the simplest and most complete version. It is a primarily the 1993 Anthology set combined with elements from the 97 scores and then re-equalized by ABC. I need to track down the 1993 Anthology set so I can finally have every official version and have an actual decent sounding official Trilogy.
The transfer of the RSO Star Wars LP confirms that the UK LP is more detailed and warmer than the US 20th Century Fox edition. I need to look for the LPs of ESB and ROTJ to hear their strengths.
I found this article by a member of the Steve Hoffman forums. 52 highly detailed pages on the recording and various editions of the Trilogy scores. Absolutely required reading.
http://www.malonedigital.com/starwars.htm
Of course, this article mentions things about the lack of proper storage and care by Lucasfilm…hmm sound familiar at all?
I never knew that there were so many differences and mixes between the SW scores. Which ones are your favorites? I think The Anthology set, original LPs and ABC’s ESB audiophile edition are probably the closest we’ll ever get to definitive sounding versions.
hairy_hen said:
But if you thought Star Wars had a lot of bass in it, just wait until you hear Empire. ;)
YOU WEREN'T KIDDING WERE YOU? ;)
ESB is rather like the 70mm mix. Compared to the original 93 track everything is more subtle. It does take a larger setup to really hear the difference though. Listening on computer speakers will not cut it. I noticed things in the soundtrack that I normally don't such as the amount of echo on Luke's voice at the end of the duel.
But the amount of bass is stunning! I expected there to be a bit more here and there but it rocks consistently. Listening to this track really shows off the increased production values and advancements in technology. Everything is cleaner and more defined as well as localized perfectly. When I have viewed bits of the 97 ESB, the bass and effects can get overwhelming at times. I was afraid of this maybe occurring but it doesn't. For example, the appearance of the Wampa in the 97 mix is so enormous that it makes you fly right out of your seat and cover your ears. Here, it is as loud as it should be and more dynamic while preserving the dramatic intent.
On an actual surround system this easily bests the 93 mix and is more of an immersive experience than the theatrical stereo. I still prefer the stereo as a purist,(Still can't believe original ESB and ROTJ mixes are available to us!!) but when I watch ESB on a sound system, this will be the mix I listen to.
I intend to view ROTJ soon, and since I have both the 97 LD and Faces disc of it I'll compare all three.
The Long Snoot Odyssey in IMAX 3D.
Was the 4 track version released? I don't think any theater could have been equipped for it at the time. Another reason is because Dolby had to come up with their stereo matrix and SR later in the 80's to do this.
To watch the V3 dvds I wound up playing the vob files in sequential order. As long as you change the system settings to play sequential files in order it works perfectly, but it only will play the default audio. And for some odd reason the default order will switch on a single vob file. For example, I was watching the ESB V3 with hh's 5.1 and then for a vob it defaulted to the isolated score. This same thing happened on the last vob file of ANH. So now I'm trying a reauthor with just the 5.1 track to see if that fixes the problem.